With HT set to 1.0 how high can the Frequency go without hitting cold bug?
Printable View
With HT set to 1.0 how high can the Frequency go without hitting cold bug?
I think so. IIRC, Sampsa and others went this route. IIRC, they mostly overclocked via Multi only. I don't believe much FSB was done either.Quote:
Originally Posted by G0ldBr1ck
I didnt word that right. what I meant was how high can the NB go before hitting the coldbug.Quote:
Originally Posted by Throwed
It's hard overclock cpu by FSB, when CPU don't have it.Quote:
Originally Posted by Throwed
Ahh, the day after Christmas. When peoples hearts are full of joy and human kindness..
Well, I thought they were till I came here and saw the old Lets bash X and inflame the guys..
Ok, took my shovel and cleaned out the garbage and then did a little sweeping to clean it up.
Gentlemen, be friends will ya?
Man, can't ya just sit back and say lets see what this new beast from AMD will really do in mortal hands?
And then this troll bringing up ancient history about Intel as if the Universe would have changed had they been lilly white and angelic in their business practices.. JEEZ..
If your so riled up that you can't come here without fighting maybe it's time to go release some of that testosterone in another way.
No, I'm not going to say what I'm thinking but for Christ's sake literally, relax a bit will ya?
I did 220htt with -160 °C ht 2.0 1320 MHZ for all benches and found out (somehow) settings short afterwards with dice -60°C core idle 250htt boot - I think HTT will raise sooner or later for the results. Testing with multi is just so easy for initial, short testing and you tend to leave out htt for a second ;) but 300 HTT has already been reached with Destroyer on Air and I don't think -195° will pull it down to 200...
Low HTT = Low memory freq. -> bad performenceQuote:
Originally Posted by SoF
that's only for other chips like the X2. phenom's have ram dividers.Quote:
Originally Posted by ryba
The Hypertransport has a separate multi from the MemControler. IMC can remain at 2000 regardless of HTQuote:
Originally Posted by ryba
Wrote this in another threadQuote:
Originally Posted by AbelJemka
http://www.xtremesystems.org/forums/...&postcount=285
Sample calculation for total fps, just to show (very simplified):
Resolution = 800x600
C2Q: 10 seconds 30 fps, 60 seconds 50 fps, 30 seconds 100 fps = (10x30 + 60x50 + 30x100) / 100 = 63 FPS
Phenom: 10 seconds 40 fps, 60 seconds 50 fps, 30 seconds 70 fps = (10x30 + 60x50 + 30x100) / 100 = 54 FPS
Resolution = 1920x1200 (video card cuts frames on 50 fps and lowers the rest some)
C2Q: 10 seconds 25 fps, 60 seconds 40 fps, 30 seconds 50 fps = (10x25 + 60x40 + 30x50) / 100 = 41 FPS
Phenom: 10 seconds 35 fps, 60 seconds 40 fps, 30 seconds 50 fps = (10x35 + 60x40 + 30x50) / 100 = 42 FPS
Allways we have some dividers, but way to calculate memory freq. is different on old X2 and Phenoms.Quote:
Originally Posted by demonkevy666
What you are doing in this forum if you don't see different betwen HT and HTT?Quote:
Originally Posted by G0ldBr1ck
I know that you are from usa, but think about you read here, is not that hard.
htt = hyper threading technology?Quote:
Originally Posted by ryba
Quote:
Originally Posted by ryba
you know what, never mind. not gonna take the bait.
So where is this low HTT in SOF's post you quoted? all I see is above default speeds so I guessed you must have meant the HT link speed, The only thing that was low in his post.Quote:
Originally Posted by ryba
Phenoms have 2 freqs. one for NB (what i belive that is memory controller, which is said to have to be either equal or higher than the HT freq, on my phenom 9850 it is 10 by default (2000 mhz) and so is HT Link.
any1 who have a phenom can easyly see it in memory section, NB speed, and you got the normal HT link.
Does the NB freq matter at all ?this is though for memory i reccon, but that is what I!! belive, so theese are no facts except what the standard frequencies are. ( what i mean is, does the NB freq make the chip coldbug at all, or is to just to leave it at standard. is this whats been done on all sessions. i already know 1000 mhz HT link means that many chips can go down to almost 190- on LN2 but well, they have never ever mentioned the NB freq.
SOF, tested that at all ?
And yeah true, phenoms have dividers for memory :) pitty i cannot run lower than CL4 on 1066 mhz.
Yepp, that's what i found in the BKDG also. Guess they mean ref HT.Quote:
Originally Posted by roofsniper
Memspeed = ref HT / mem dividerQuote:
Originally Posted by imsochobo
NB speed = ref HT * NB Multi
CPU speed = ref HT * CPU Multi
HT speed = ref HT * HT multi
HT multi must be less or equal with the NB multi.
The on die memory controller and the L3 cache run at NB speed.
HT speed is most interesting in dual/multi socket systems because the chips are connented via HT.
On single socket systems it may have an minimal impact on games. On boards with sideport memory this memory is connected via HT also if I understood macci correct.
i think sometimes people get confused and say it. i know i do sometimes. maybe they are thinking of hyper transport terminal. idkQuote:
Originally Posted by justapost
and yes nb/ht speeds do matter. you can see there are some pics around here with people messing around with the nb speeds and theres a big difference.
http://valid.canardpc.com/show_oc.php?id=471470 another one came in today.
"ref HT", "HT multi", "HTT", & etc. naming conventions are why I started using "clock" or "reference clock" instead of the other options(though "reference clock" isn't exactly right, either, it's gets the point across) and using "HT Link" helps as well, though it isn't as convenient as a couple of capped letters. HT Link and clock speeds are often confused in all those abbreviations and it's very confusing for n00bs as well as people translating posts to another language. But the labeling discussion has been going on almost as long as the A64's have been out. Too bad things got off on the wrong foot so many years ago - now it's just a mess. :(
Nice! With all the great results pouring in I hope I can find a way to snag one of these come February. I'm already getting unhappy with my 9950 OC results - after looking at all the 940 OC's 3.2GHz just doesn't seem so good anymore ... ;)Quote:
Originally Posted by roofsniper
Excellent. I have a few friends that work for Airgas DryIce/Carbonics. I can get a box of Pellets from them for free. I may try a DICE run when I get my Denebs to see if I can get similar results.Quote:
Originally Posted by roofsniper
Enjoy with this guy benching a phenom II 5,2GHZ, (with video)
http://forum.breakthelimit.net/index...st=0&#entry754
LOL...Yeah. That's Coolice. He posts here too. What I find interesting is his 4M time in Super Pi is what I get on 1M with my 5000+ BE at stock.Quote:
Originally Posted by noki
2m 30s ...?!? :eek:Quote:
Originally Posted by Throwed
:D
then i think there is something wrong with your cpu lol.Quote:
Originally Posted by Throwed
Bah, I read result incorrectly. I get 28 secs in 1M Super Pi......too much Eggnog when i read/post.:shrug:Quote:
Originally Posted by roofsniper
Figured as much. I had to look twice myself. I thought it was a bad 1M result when I saw it. It wasn't until you pointed out the 4M that I even noticed it ... ;)Quote:
Originally Posted by Throwed
Yay, a fellow alcoholic!:toast:Quote:
Originally Posted by QuietIce
Well I am pretty keen to get one of these when they are officially out. The results so far are looking up. I have been on the Intel road for far too long. My last AMD system was an Athlon 2000+ :/
Hey it would be great to hear your insight on using an AMD based system after having been so long on Intel. I would be very interested to hear you opinion if the AMD system feels smoother or not.Quote:
Originally Posted by Shogan
There has been many discussions regarding peeps saying that their AMD based systems feel 'smoother' than their Intel based systems. I know I am going a little off topic, but your post, for me was unique as there not many peeps who cay say that is
'I have been on the Intel road for far too long. My last AMD system was an Athlon 2000+'
There are many who say, only benchmarks can be used to determine performance, however I am not in total agreement. With regards to non Nehelam cores, the fact that the north bridge is not situated in the CPU, for me at least means that some latency differences occur between multi core AMD CPU's and Intel CPU's.
Not all people are as responsive with regards to the environmental changes that occur around them. Personally I have often that certain notebook configarations that use an AMD single core CPU, has felt 'snapier' than faster spec-ed Intel counterparts.
Ofcourse there is a strong arguments that a more stingent test environment needs to be in place as to test why some peeps feel AMD systems feel 'smoother' and 'snapier' and I couldnt agree more with chain of thought.
However this may never happen, heheheeee
:)
So it would be great to hear comments regarding Denebs performance once you have your system in place. Im sure you are going to have alot of fun
:up:
I cant wait to get a Phenom II, am hoping for 4Ghz stable on my WC setup with moderate voltages. Im currently running 3.3Ghz with 1.47v, prime stable, so if I can get 4Ghz with similar power consumption I will be than happy
:yepp:
Well, fugger says Phenom + BS = smootherQuote:
Originally Posted by mongoled
I say BS + possible bias + closed mind = uninformed opinion
I have a Q6600, E7200, and E8400 sitting in my closet right now that say otherwise.
Maybe my 4870 just plays nicer with an AMD chipset, but I will argue 'til worlds end that I get better framerate stability with this setup than with either my Q6600 or my E8400/Gigabyte P35 DS3L, which is a comparable quality board to the Biostar 790GX I am using.
You know what the good thing here is though don't ya. If and when Deneb becomes a success, more and more people are going to be crossing over to AMD from Intel. So when people start telling their experiences, it should be good publicity. I've read hundreds of posts already, that say it's a better experience, and that was with the original Phenom. It seems to me, AMD are seriously pushing the platform idea. And I think it's a pretty good one at that. However, it may not turn out that way. lol But, i'd lay odds that it will. :)
Disclaimer:
I may have had a few too many...
Well...
What i think amd can win very much on is their game system, every single lan im at, there is some stupid idiot who have bought an laptop and just swipping in for a game or two, they copy the game, trying to start it, and starting to shout and swear out.
THIS LAPTOP WAS SUPPOSED TO BE F****N good and they go on, and i watch, ahh intel IGP, dont expect to do other than office and msn on that one ;)
AMD make products which atleast can do "household" games like sims, sim city, and that with good graphics, ive personally tested the HD3300, and that was an good experience for an IGP to be!.
amd have pushed out a system called game, game ultra and so on.
this tells an stupid consumer: this can run old and mild new games.
or : this can run crysis!
their platforms can be a big hit, and it can make costumers understand what it can or what it cannot, try explaining the diffrent components and what they mean in terms of usage to an not so enlightened user.
then i can just say: GOOD LUCK.
but just that will take a long time before it will become an term for an "normal" person.
Amd with an complete platform can do just this, when games come with an label minimum requirements :
AMD game REV1 for instance.
REccomended AMD game REV3
would ease some conversations for me to say the least.
hope amd gets back in the game, more compotition, safer future for amd, and for us consumers when it comes to value for our beloved cash!
LOL!! A bit early ain't it? Anyways, don't forget that in order to get people to cross over from Intel to Amd then Phenom II needs to offer a definite reason to switch. It doesn't it. For someone who already owns AM2 then it makes sense simple as that but for those that don't it gets complicated.Quote:
Originally Posted by flippin_waffles
I agree with you that if you right now have any Intel quad , then there's no reasons to switch unless you like to play with the new phenom II :p: , but for any one building a new system , Phenom II providing as good performance and overclock ability, much much better power draw than Phenom1 (Could be better that COMPETITION , but no reviews till now on this) ,running really COOL as competing Intel products for a decent price AND OBVIOUSLY NOT TO END UP WITH A DEAD PLATFORM...Socket775, Phenom II specially the AM3 socket really looks good. :up:Quote:
Originally Posted by qurious63ss
Yes, but i'm still celebrating Christmas. :DQuote:
Originally Posted by qurious63ss
Anyway, it seems to me that the excitement mounting is going to make 2009 a good year. This doesn't even resemble the orginal Phenom launch. I'd bet AMD has a good stockpile of these spread around the world and they seem to be indicating they anticipate a fairly successful launch.
Only one problem, C2Q will either match or beat all the things you mention. Only thing left is upgradeability, but how important is that when it looks like it will take at least a new architecture from Amd to surpass Intel's performance.Quote:
Originally Posted by Blaber
http://i40.tinypic.com/jkzwp0.jpgQuote:
Originally Posted by qurious63ss
Phenom II CLK/NB @ 3.7/2.25 Ghz Using DDRII, So how much of an improvement in scores one will see on PhenomII using DDR3 @ 1333 and Nb @ 2.7 Ghz where as there is nothing more that u can do to Intel quad to get more performance like U can't increase NB speed to gain performance , its already running DDR3..So as I said when building a new system going for a s775 dead platform is not really best thing to do.;)
How much performance are we talking about 3-5%?? and that would be best case scenario.Like I said before, it will still take a new generation from Amd to beat C2Q so the 775 being dead is a moot point.
I've just build a rig with a Phenom 9950, Asus M3A79-T Deluxe and 2GB Crucial Ballistix Tracers 1066 memory, and the main reason for me building the rig was to do some AMD clocking before trying out Phenom II. Now I've still got an E8400 and Q6600 and an Asus Rampage Extreme mobo with 2GB OCZ DDR3 2000mhz memory which is basically my benching system. Now hwving played games (Far Cry 2 and Crysis) on both rig, I can really feel the difference, and checking the FPS it's basically the same at 1680x1050 with an overclocked GTX280 in both setups. It's clear that the 2GB memory is a bit of a hamper, and I'm still trying to get 4 x 1GB sticks of memory to work in the AMD setup, but I'll get there eventually.
When I start running benchies it's a whole different story, with the Intel setup clearly beating the AMD hands down.
I'm glad I got the 9950, and I'm running the 9950 at 3.3Ghz 24/7 stable with 1.4Vcore. I am using cheap water cooling, but my temps never exceeds 52C under load, and it would idle around 42C.
Just been testing out my 9950BE and it's doing well, though I admit I'm not very impressed with the voltage regulation on the M3A78-T. I guess I've been spoiled OC'ing A8N32's (8-phase power) for the past 2.5 years, I expect voltage to be spot on and stay there. The M3A32 (8+2) I've been using since April has been even more solid than the A8N32's.
FYI for anybody buying a newer AM2+ board - stick with 8+2 power and heat-sinked MOSFETs! :)
S-t-r-e-t-c-h ... :ROTF:Quote:
Originally Posted by qurious63ss
:ROTF: Yes indeed my friend. It has been a long S-t-r-e-t-c-h but unless you see something that i don't then it will take something more the Phenom II to beat C2Q.Quote:
Originally Posted by QuietIce
Phenom IIs,especially AM3 ones,will do just fine against same clocked Penryns ;)
Yes, they will. The question I guess is will they beat them so that people who already own C2 will switch?Quote:
Originally Posted by informal
There are enough systems being built every day it doesn't matter if existing owners switch or not. The only thats going to matter is if the whole AMD system is the same price or cheaper than Intel. And, IMO, most people aren't going to care about the DDR2 - DDR3 war. If they care at all they'll stick with DDR2 (and AM2+) because of the DDR3 price tag ...
The price is key factor here.If AMD's platform cost is lower than the one for C2Q,than it will depend on the user.If Phenom II is better than C2Q in the particular model of usage for the user in question,then i don't see why one wouldn't switch over.The platform will offer maybe the best bang/buck.C2Q already offers a nice ratio,but Phenom II competition will be quite strong,especially the AM3 one since chips can run in AM2(+) boards.Quote:
Originally Posted by qurious63ss
i7 on the other hand does offer some 15-17% better perf. on average against Phenom II/C2Q but at much higher cost in both platform cost and power draw.
Both C2 and PII are equal as far as "platform" is concerned. MB, memory, etc. are about equal with C2 having a better MB selection. PII prices haven't been released but make no mistake about it, Intel can easily beat them in a price to performance ratio.Quote:
Originally Posted by informal
To me, having a uniform chipset, gpu, and processor makes an attractive proposition. All combined to form a firey Dragon. heh
most stores in holland have them in stock now !!! :D
I have to admit that while not the fastest gear on the market, this 790GX/9950/4870 rig has been one of the most enjoyable gaming rigs I've owned to date, and I started on Wolfenstein 3D.Quote:
Originally Posted by flippin_waffles
I disagree. Maybe if you are talking dual cores, but as far as quads go, the Q6600 is being phased out, and intel's cheaper penryn quads have low multis which can limit OC unless you are on a decent (read: more expensive) motherboard. I think it will be neck and neck in the $250-$350 range.Quote:
Originally Posted by qurious63ss
You are also missing part of his point, actually something that many people seem to miss. I am not the first person who finds their AMD platform running a bit "cleaner" than their previous Q6600 rig. As I stated before I still have my Q6600/P35 combo sitting in the closet and would surely be running that instead if I liked it better. I am going to turn it into a crunching rig when I get around to it but I am sticking with my current rig for gaming for the moment.
My point was that Intel can and will drop prices on Penryn to keep the price/perf ratio on their court.Quote:
Originally Posted by iandh
Please elaborate on the "cleaner" notion.
Even if Intel cut prices, their hands are rather tied as they phased out their sweet spot CPU (9450).
Wolfdale 3M takes a 10% performance hit in gaming compared to 6M. Yorkfield 6M should have the same hit WRT 12M.
They HAVE to cut prices to make the 9400 even competitive with the 920 (which should be at 230-250) that probably beats it due to the cache.
Now 9550 vs 940 is more subjective, as perf/clock is better on the first when tested with DDR3-1866. It all depends on the pricing. AMD has pitted the 940 against the Q9400 and 9300 in marketing slides, which means that pricing is around that vicinity, probably slightly over or undercutting the 9400's 270USD.
The 9550 is still a good deal as it stands, but once newer revisions (even with the same stepping/new stepping) of the P-II roll out with better silicon performance and better OCabilities (now cold bug is resolved entirely, no need for 1Ghz HT anymore on the new revs) the 9550 will actually lose quite some of its lustre.
Platform wise we'll see. If what AMD's implying about using Lucid Hydra in RD890 is true, and if the end result is great (not really needing nVidia's cooperation, just ATI and Lucid themselves making a better MGPU solution) then you bet people will switch to the new platform because it offers something that even the LGA1366 platform doesn't.
AMD uses 45 NM Light imm... something SOI production tech = Lower cost than intel quads.
Amd also gets less "waste" cpu's by doing triquads.
How effective the fabs are compared to intel is out of my knowledge, but well, any1 got numbers of DIE surface on both ? if they are simular amd got it nicely done this time and giving intel some serious compotition.
I
Actually a SOI wafer costs quite a lot more then a standard bulk silicon wafer intel uses. :yepp:Quote:
Originally Posted by imsochobo
But since noone know how the yield on intels 45nm Ci7 nor on AMDs 45nm Deneb is, its kinda uesles to talk ybout such things as production costs.
Ok. Following is a description of my hardware addiction:Quote:
Originally Posted by qurious63ss
The AMD chips I currently have in my possession are: X2 3600+, 4000+, 5000+ BE, Phenom 8450, and Phenom 9950.
The intel chips I currently have in my possession are: (had) E2180, E5200, E7200, E8400, Q6600.
For AMD mobos I have a Biostar Tforce550, and Biostar 790GX. For intel, Gigabyte P35 DS3L, and MSI X48 (dead).
I have three different sets of DDR2 800 memory. One G.Skill 2x2Gb, one Corsair XMS 2x1Gb, and one Kingston value 2x1Gb.
For GPU's I have (had) an evga GTX 260 core 216, (had) Visiontek 4850, (had) Visiontek 4870 512, and my current card, Powercolor 4870.
I have played with nearly every conceivable configuration of this hardware, and the "cleanest" or "smoothest" (evidently BS from what I hear) running setup out of them all has been my 790GX/9950/4870 combo. That means least stuttering, best framerate stability, least crashes (stock or OC), least trouble with driver errors, least trouble with hardware changes.
Why is this?
Could be:
1. Mobo peculiarities
2. Ram peculiarities
3. Defective CPU's (umm not likely)
4. An all AMD platform runs better (dunno, maybe)
5. Luck of the draw?
I prefer my Phenom/790GX over my Q6600/P35 in gaming, whether stock or OC'ed. It just seems to run games smoother. Although the average framerate is lower, I seem to get better framerate stability.
Some may say I am imagining it or spouting BS, but I most certainly do not feel that I am.
I am not necessarily saying that AMD or intel is "better" for gaming, all I am saying is "Here is the hardware I have, and here is what I consider to run the best out of the hardware I currently possess"
The funny thing is that I am not the only person I have seen have the same experience, so either we are all imagining it, or there is something going on that can't easily be shown with benchmarks and graphs. ;)
many people have said it is smoother and the only people i have seen turn it down are people who prefer intel. and the people that are saying it is smoother are mostly people that are neutral and have had experiences with both platforms. i can't say for myself if it is smoother or not but if you look at the design it makes sense. there is no way you can show this on paper that it is smoother its only something you can learn by word of mouth. and if it is smoother then imo its better for gaming. many people refuse to believe this but hey most of those people have never even ran amd before.
might as well avoid that subject. It always leads to flames.
I would say lets be patient with this topic , as more people start switching from Intel to Amd , they will experience the difference them selves.
I don't understand how this information cannot be captured in Fraps.Quote:
Originally Posted by roofsniper
how so? i guess if you took videos of both and compared them together it might work. but the best way to tell is by comparing them side by side. and there are many people that have tested this and have said that it is smoother. so you would just have to trust them. kinda want to avoid this topic since as g0ldbr1ck has said it will just lead to flames.Quote:
Originally Posted by _Lone_Wolf_
Fraps does not record stuttering and framerate drops, it records average framerate.Quote:
Originally Posted by _Lone_Wolf_
some people use the video capture although still it will be compressed and it is best to view them side by side.Quote:
Originally Posted by iandh
Far from stable, or even benchable but a scuicide screeny that makes me smile
Running crucial basilisk (love this ram want it to have my children one day) 1.5v runnint 4569mhz 1235 HT 2470 NB and 658 memory....once again still on air. Apologies for abscense went on vacation, then have been spending many tedious hours aiming for highest clock on lowest volts.
AS I SAID, FAR FROM STABLE, IT'S A SCUICIDE SCREENIE
W00t!...very nice!!...:clap::clap:
iocedmyself, have you searched for your prime stable limit on this chip (on air?)
Impressive clock! :clap::clap::rolleyes:
How cold AIR was for this run?? Room temperature or you used little winter help? :D
http://i245.photobucket.com/albums/g...eneb/3D_05.jpg
CPU AMD on LN2.
Dante80, honestly as people are usually crying for superPi 1m scores i've kinda veered from trying prime to often other then as a curiosity of my own, have finished 4 core run at 4.3ghz in prime if i recall correctly will have to give that another go here after i recover from new years eve. :D
Sometime in the next week (granted i can get all the cooling together) i'm hoping to have everything underwater (4870x2 cpu, ram, chipset and southbridge) with a chiller in the loop, as well as do some good old fashioned TEC testing ;) on a 790FX/750sb board. Though the ram under water isn't really top priority as i already am in love with this ram. $43 for 2x2gig of 800mhz 4-4-4-12 1T @ 1.8v in last screeny was running 5-5-5-15, and taking timings out to 6-6-6- and 24 or something and pushing voltage to DDR1 era 2.44 i've gotten it past 1450mhz. Though i wouldn't try to push it that hard for long as it started getting cuddy past 1350 as it prolly got a bit toasty....
even so...
BEST RAM EVER :up:
Lightman, i wish i could have a little winter help but i live in houston,tx...winter here usually means the 60's and people acting as if the next ice age is in effect :p: hehe actually have been testing in a bit lower temps, down from 23-24c to 19-20c so nothing to drastic just closed heat vent in test room.
Anyway, i need to get some sleep and test later, just wanted to bring in the new year with a bit of shiny hardware bliss and share it with all of you :D
when amd users start talking about "responsiveness/smoothness" of their amd gaming rig compared to intel ones, people respond by saying amd users start hallucinating/spewing bs to justify their rig having a better gaming performance that doesnt necessarily show on benchmarks/graphs.Quote:
Originally Posted by iandh
the best way to do this to try to qualify/quantify these "feel" thingy which is very subjective.
since you have both intel and amd rigs, you are in the best opportunity to perform this. im not suggesting/asking you do this, just saying maybe if you want to make this "objective", you can actually do this.
this is what i have in mind:
1. load 2 or more games on intel/amd rig.
2. run fraps or equivalent utility.
3. alt-tab on different games.
4. observe drop in fps if theres any.
5. vary timing on alt-tabbing.
6. upload the result.
then people can see it for themselves which one is 'smoother/more responsive' machine.
just make sure you label the correct video matches the right rig lol.
just my 2 cents. btw, im pro amd ;).
Thats even more impressive man, thanks for the prompt answer...now, go get some rest...:clap::clap:Quote:
Originally Posted by iocedmyself
ahh i love to see you hype up the ballistix like that, i just ordered 8gb for $84 :)
your "test" is nothing more then a artifical stress test for the memory sub system of a cpu. :p:Quote:
Originally Posted by sundancerx
Guess who will win this. :rolleyes:
For my personal experience there was no more "smoothness increasment" after my first A64 X2, all other CPU i ever had since then never felt more smooth or slower or what else then the X2.
hmm, i dont really have extensive knowledge about cpus, so i really dont know if that would be true. if it is true then without even going through the tests, we have quantified/qualified that "smoothness" on phenoms is no longer relative/subjective but can be objectively attributed with phenoms having better memory sub system design compared to intel cpu's -except i7's i supposed.Quote:
Originally Posted by Hornet331
you agree on this?
second, i assume i7's having "smoother feel" also compared to penryn's. any i7 owners can attest to this? esp those who upgrade from penryn's?
edit:btw, as i said im no expert and in no way im trying to sound one. just trying to offer my 2 cents as everytime i read someone mention smoothness, everybody freaks out. and its not just this forum, ive read it across multiple review sites. so...
Even better: If someone has machines with various brands of CPU they can make a type of benchmark that CAN be measured and repeated. If they ADD other benchmark(s) at the SAME TIME then they can create some interesting Xtreme conditions. They could try to find something that slows down one machine but not the other AND is repeatable.Quote:
Originally Posted by sundancerx
For example: What happens on various CPU if you are running Prime95 WHILE playing a game? Does it make one system bog down and the other doesn't even notice? Does the Prime95 go slower?
If you run 4 threads of Prime95 (perhaps 8?), a game benchmark, and everything works without problems... then add something else like a virus scanner. You can keep adding different things that use up various resources one at a time until either one or both machines slow down. Then back off a bit and see if you can determine which machine had problems first. It this process is repeatable then you have found a method to determine "smoothness".
Of course if one brand works better than the other when this process is done... you can expect some people to claim: "I never run all of that stuff at the same time so it doesn't matter to me." However if this kind of thing can be measured AND proven then it is definitely something to consider.
The problem is that this type of "Xtreme" benchmark is not easy to find. In fact various people have already tried the 4xPrime95 + Game test. We didn't really see any differences between brands. So the hypothetical "slowdown" would take a lot of work to actually find and will require more work.
EDIT: BTW: I do actually expect this process to happen... but it very probable that it will be done by somebody testing between the new Intel i7 and and older Intel chip of comparable speed.
My CPU history beginning from P4 and skipping everything before 2000Quote:
Originally Posted by sundancerx
P4->X2->C2D/(A64 for HTPC)->C2D 45nm quad->C2D 45nm->Ci7
Ever since I switched from a P4 to a X2 there never was a feeling that is was more smoother even from dualcore C2D to quad core Ci7.
The only thing i noticed and made a habbit of mine, is that if os older then 6month it tends to get boged down by software installs and all the garbage that accumulates. So i reinstall my my os every 6-8 months (coincidently the last 2 years i buy new hardware every 6-8 months :p:).
I dont see how this will prove anything, if you run max threads of prime on a quad core and then start a game every system will output less fps, it doesn't matter if its intel or amd or any other cpu.Quote:
Originally Posted by keithlm
As a matter of fact, i just benched a similar thing on my Ci7.
Running Boinc with 8 threads and benching crysis costs me ~2fps on avarage and 4fps on the min fps as compared to when i only run crysis alone.
But a note: boinc runs as low priority process so if i would run prime which has normal priority it will hurt the game even more.
By your defenition Ci7 would be smother then K10 be default, cause it can handle more threads better due to HT.
This whole "Smoother Myth" (yes i call it a myth cause i never expired it even though i had my share of expirience a lot of processors) is in my eyes more related to other things then just the cpu.
Imho the most important factor is the HDD, i have played around with some SDD and my old Notebook (Singelcore P-M 1,6GHz 1GB RAM) that had an old slow ass 4200rpm drive. Holy moly i never thought how responsive this old thing could get just by upgrading the HDD. :shocked:
Another thing is RAM, you never can have enough ram, when the system starts swapping it slows down.
lets stay on topic if you want to find a way to test for how smooth something is then make another thread.
The problem is that we can't record anything useful by recording average framerate. Does fraps capture jumps between loading map areas or view distance spawns in games like oblivion and fallout 3?Quote:
Originally Posted by sundancerx
Does is record the jumps in framerate in the large beach are in Crysis once the fireworks start flying?
That is where the difficulty is, and why it is so hard for some people to grasp. People on this site are SO FASCINATED with graphs that they can't see anything else.
I work at a research institution and we encounter things on a daily basis that are not represented well in our test numbers and graphs.
I suppose in one way this is going off topic, but in another we are indirectly discussing how the architecture used in the Phenom II will behave in gaming.Quote:
Originally Posted by Hornet331
I personally have never had an X2 based rig that ran completely smooth in gaming, regardless of title or framerate. Core 2 was marginally better, and C2Q was better still in some games during action intensive scenes, although it didn't provide any framerate increase.
Another thing that really cracks me up in the whole dual vs. quad argument (further off topic), is that people think that just because a quad isn't acheiving higher framerates means it isn't running any better...
Just because you haven't personally experienced something doesn't mean it is a myth. I could almost say it is borderline flamebait being that we are so closely approaching an actual logical conversation on this topic.Quote:
Originally Posted by Hornet331
I will aggree that HDD does have a lot to do with load times, and additionally running your games on a second hard drive from your OS can help quite a bit with stuttering and stability issues, but IME it does not eliminate them completely.
When I use the same HDD and OS install on different mobos and CPU's, and use different ram on each, and still experience different behavior between them, it tells me that there is something else going on that I don't know about yet.
I work at a company that manufactures semiconductor equipment, my brother in law is a process engineer at intel, and I interact with some very sharp folk on an almost daily basis. I can say wholeheartedly that there is a lot more going on in a computer platform than just plain old number crunching. Each platform has its own personality and own strengths and weaknesses due to architectural differences.
I'm sure this whole "smoothness" thing would be a lot easier to sell to an engineer at a server OEM- they work on a little bit different platfom integration level than just slapping some crap together and shooting zombies ;)
edit: Here's a random quote I found while reading the internet; this further reinforces my comment regarding engineers at server OEM's (I wrote that before I found this):
Quote:
Originally Posted by some dood
Regardless of whether you believe it has an effect on gaming or not, intel and AMD platforms running specific applications differently is a FACT, not a MYTH.
ok, sorry for the off topic. i wasnt trying to derail the thread or try to flamebait anyone. i just grew tired reading about amd system being smoother/or more responsive. i just hope someone or some review site can put and end to this one. again im no expert, so i just offered my 2cents to quantify those "feel". i guess the burden of proof is on the amd side. sorry again.Quote:
Originally Posted by roofsniper
Ah woke up at 2pm, startin the new year out right ;)
Todays project will be tidying up the fresh installs of Xp, 64bit Xp Vista and Windows 7 beta. Though i will prolly focus on 32bit xp and max stable prime speed.
Crazydiamond (love the handle if it's actually a floyd reference :p: ) gratz on the shiny ram purchase, was pleasantly surprised when i got it as i had intended to give it to a buddy of mine as part of xmas gift but it didn't end up getting delivered till after i left on vacation thus i gave him the 1066 gskill instead. Didn't even find out about how overclockable it was until after i got my hands on it, and was even more pleasantly surprised when i looked at the spd tab on cpuz to see how it listed timing info
At 400mhz timings of 4-4-4-12-24-2T @ 2.0v
AND
At 500mhz timings of 5-5-5-15-30 2T @ 2.0v
Set the speed to 1067 in bios and it booted up perfectly fine @ 1.8v 5-5-5-15-30 bumping voltage to 2.1 will bring Cas down to 4.
I consider it very on topic as long as we continue to discuss how the Phenom/Phenom II system architecture may/may not effect gaming, and keep it civil and intelligent as we have so far. :up:Quote:
Originally Posted by sundancerx
I think I have explained quite well with what we need to aim for as far as testing, and unfortunately I don't know that this is something that we could easily measure with any benchmark on either side of the fence. We would probably need AMD/intel confidential debugging software and equipment to see how data routing is happening at the platform level, and I seriously doubt any of us will ever be given access to that type of thing to see how video games run, sadly. ;)
Besides speculation, first hand experience, and logical reasoning, we are pretty much left to just trusting each other. I am an intelligent, truthful, and highly skilled individual. I work at an electronics manufacturer that interacts not only with the semiconductor industry, but with the military sector (ONR, ARL), and respected research institutions such as JHU. My current project partner is the group supervisor for the Space and Astrophysical Plasmas group at NASA/JPL and has a Ph.D. in Space Plasma Physics. We just had one of AMD's fellows visit last month to review some equipment they are purchasing from us.
I consider myself to be highly intelligent (never tested less than 99th percentile), and work on a daily basis with people that make me look like a blithering idiot moron. There are many times in research projects that we see behaviors which at first are not easily explained by the math or the data. That does not mean that those behaviors are any less real, or that we are somehow failing at our tasks.
A closed mind, or thinking you already know everything there is to know, is never a good place to be. There is not a single person on this site that knows everything there is to know about computer platforms.
I'm switching from 940 to am2 to 775 from time to time, and the most "smooth" setup of those 3 is the am2 setup. Not too much difference, though, and I have a hard time proving anything, but that's just my .02.Quote:
Originally Posted by sundancerx
What burden of prrof are you talking about, btw? That AMD are smoother than Intel? If the opposite is true, I'd like to see some proof there as well.
yes it is but without any facts or anything that can prove anything it will go no where. i don't know how you can prove it but from what i have heard it makes sense. i said about a year ago about this whole phenom smoother thing that it had to do with the fast hyper transport speeds and the fact that the cpu has such low latency and it can just whip things out lightning speed. when you have things like super pi or something that sits in the cpu cache and doesn't really exit the cpu that often intel will get better performance. but with the way amd has designed their platform and made the connection speeds so fast it just seems obvious that it would be smoother. in games the gpu is making the frames the cpu just needs to process them. if they are being sent in at different rates because of the low I/O latency then it will not be as smooth even if you have more frames. if someone can find a way to prove this then so be it. possibly you could get an amd and intel system tuned up perfectly and take fps measurements every second and put them together. from what i would think the intel machine would have a more jagged graph/results while the amd one should have smoother results. if someone can find a way to prove this fine but it seems like all it is going to be is pages of people arguing back and forth because there is no data to present.Quote:
Originally Posted by iandh
Quote:
Originally Posted by roofsniper
I suppose we could record FPS with rivatuner and expand the graphs out, but it would be rather hard to show it at a decent resolution becuase this is something that happens momentarily over long periods of time, so to be able to view enough sub-second detail to accurately compare the two we would need an expanded graph the length of a schoolbus.
As I said before my hunch is as well that it has to do with platform architecture, but to actually view these things accurately on either side we would need access to equipment that we just can't have access to without signing an NDA, and even then we probably couldn't talk about the results and testing methods afterwards.
what do you need?Quote:
Originally Posted by iandh
Which chip we ultimately decide to buy does not really matter for the company itself.
What matters is what the OEM think about the chip. Intel is a strong force but companies like DELL , HP , etc have defied intel before and will again if the deal is good. In terms for overall performance it is not that bad atleast a bit faster in some comparison to say the Q9550 but at quite a lesser cost. Along with this the fact that it can take a lot of V's means it has better power management than the Intel chips and that means a more sturdy chip "Some defective motherboards can shock your processors up to 1.8V due to USB cross linking"
Overall this does not look bad for the OEM's as lower platform cost means lower price for the consumers and since most consumers do light and med. amt of work on their computer this PhII thing would fit the bill quite well.
On another note whats up with all the new AM3 M/b's pooping up is it just me or do others feel that the 945 may come sooner than we all had thought??
what im trying to say is that, since these feelings of "smoothness" on amd rigs dont show up on charts and benchmarks (and is very hard to quantify/qualify based on a few comments i read here), pro intel people will just easily dismiss this as a myth.Quote:
Originally Posted by knopflerbruce
now if you are pro amd and you really really want this smoothness feel taken as one of the advantages of using amd system, then i think its expected that you are the ones to initiate actions, expreiment on different testing methods, find other benchmarking methods that may quantify this so called smoothness thingy. thsis is what i meant by burden of proof relies on amd. and until then, no amount explanation no matter how logical they maybe will convince hardcore fanboys on the opposite side, that indeed, its not just a myth.
sorry, im no english expert, but i hope you got my point.
you made very good logical points and if i have half of your knowledge and experience, i would be very happy. i have bachelor's degree in electrical engg and little background on electronics too, but i worked on a manufacturing company for almost a decade now. i feel like my technical background is buried and i need to dig way deep just to be able to have little conversation with you guys.:(Quote:
Originally Posted by iandh
As I said before we would likely need access to confidential AMD/intel internal testing software and equipment... for instance we use Prime95 to test our CPU's for stability, but I bet you that isn't what AMD and intel use to do their binning and stability tests. :)Quote:
Originally Posted by roofsniper
They likely have written their own testing routines. For instance, when developing a chipset, how would they determine that packets of data were being sent back and forth correctly, and more importantly if they weren't, how would they diagnose the problem and fix it without custom written testing (or at least data aquisition) software?
That also brings up the problem of if we were to somehow prove that one system ran "smoother" than another, how would we determine why this is the case without access to these things?
I was in no way trying to act like I was smarter than you or anyone else here, this forum is filled with quite a few sharp people and I am not so arrogant to think that I somehow am special... I was more trying to make the point that I am a very qualified observer and have a highly technical background.Quote:
Originally Posted by sundancerx
I actually have a little EE under my belt as well but never have gotten around to finishing a degree because I've been so busy with work. I was hired in high school at 17 and now have been there for ten years. :p:
anything more specific? also it might not be much of a tool but has anyone used cpuid's perf monitor? its kinda handy although it doesn't always work perfect as i have found a few bugs myself.Quote:
Originally Posted by iandh
well just from skimming the through the posts on gaming performance ( on an old dell laptop while im tidying up OS installs) seems pretty accurate assumption. Can't speak for t he intel data measurment practices but i'll inquire into how AMD does it, i do know that AMD has been writing the BIOS's for all of the ATI chipset boards though and then send them out to the manufactures.
as for rivatuner method of graphing frames i'll try and give that a shot here in the next day or two on nominal overclocks to start (since i've discovered that the 790GX for asus at least only wants to run 1ghz HT when the IGP is disabled) and just span the graph out over 3 1600x1200 displays.
Quote:
Originally Posted by ajaidev
ZING!
At this day and age Athlon X4 seems poised to sell well to OEMs.
Have you all seen this CF with PhII??
http://www.ocworkbench.com/2008/amd/...benchmarks.htm
While I understand your basic point here I can see what would happen on the other side of the fence. Us AMD guys actually find a way to measure this "smoothness" and show it as a "bench". Meanwhile, the Intel boys go back to their clubhouse and start talking about the AMD-biased program we're using and how it's not a true benchmark and yadda, yadda, yadda!Quote:
Originally Posted by sundancerx
Hardcore guys simply won't believe AMD is better (P4 sales of 2004-2006 is enough proof of that!) and the fence riders are going to buy whatever PR is best at the time of purchase. I doubt if anything will ever change that ...
Which would at least be a lot better than what supporters of the "smoother" have now, which is no quantifiable evidence at all. At the moment, it's no better than the people trying to sell $1000 power cables for audio or those who still think vinyl records sound better.Quote:
Originally Posted by QuietIce
And a lot of the P4 sales comes from AMD's inability to build and sell 200 million processors a year.Quote:
Hardcore guys simply won't believe AMD is better (P4 sales of 2004-2006 is enough proof of that!) and the fence riders are going to buy whatever PR is best at the time of purchase. I doubt if anything will ever change that ...
They forgot to add the resolution they tested on?Quote:
Originally Posted by ajaidev
(Crysis has 1600x1200 on the SS)
http://www.xtremesystems.org/forums/...9&postcount=42
riped out to keep this thread clean.
quick question, anyone know how to get around the 1.45 voltage limit for cpu using Amd overdrive? know there is a way but too wiped out to dig around for it again, help would be much apprieciated
go into the AOD directory (ie: C:\Program Files\AMD\OverDrive)Quote:
Originally Posted by iocedmyself
open the preferences file (right click, open with, notepad) and change the max vcore below from "0" to "1". if it crashes this file is reset sometimes back to default. I just made a shortcut to the folder on my desktop for lazyness LOL..
- <Preference>
<AutoStartOnBoot>1</AutoStartOnBoot>
<NeedConfirmOnBoot>0</NeedConfirmOnBoot>
<AutoApplySettings>0</AutoApplySettings>
<FanBrokenDetectionEnabled>0</FanBrokenDetectionEnabled>
<LogFileEnabled>0</LogFileEnabled>
<LanguageType>0</LanguageType>
<BoardVendor />
<SkinScheme />
<MaximumVCoreEnabled>1</MaximumVCoreEnabled>
</Preference>
Use higher default voltage in bios also helps things out. running 1.4 V in bios (+150 MV) 1.392-1.408 V to be exact.
MY end voltage is with maximum Vcore in AOD is :
1.600 -1.616 V According to Cpu-z and DFI smart ITE monitor.
IF youre using Gigabyte MA790FX DQ6 you will notice the voltage drops below bios voltage setting, and on some motherboards it resets it completly and decreases it by 0.25% (unconfirmed 2.1.4 and up)
DFI Lanparty UT 790FX M2R dropped belov 1.25 V on phenom 9850 which is stock.
Gigabyte just drops a notch.
Hope this and the previous post helped you're question.
*Charged3800z24
Didnt know of it, thankya =)
**Smoothness talk***
Im running P4's A64(sempron) S754 A64 X2 AM2. Phenom 9850 BE. core 2 quad(little), core 2 duo(much exp) what envoriment, and what system, OS made me just wooow.
P.S| Cant understand it either, but its like that! here's my experience.
In order slowest to fastest smoothness/speed with OS | CPU | Mem Amount: P43GHZHT|Vista|2GB, P43GHZHT|XP|2GB, C2D3ghz|Vista|4GB, A64X23.4ghz|Vista|4GB, 9850BE/Q6600|Vista/win7|4gb, Sempron2800+|XP|1GB.
So there you have it. my list, i dont get it either, my feelings, experience, the A64 sempron 2800+ 1.6 ghz with 1gb of ram was the fastest in my experience, this is surfing the web, managing servers(vmware esx) configuring switches and it included multitasking.
The a64 X2 3.4 ghz didnt feel faster.
The P4 XP and Sempron 2800+ both utilized an "Maxtor 20GB Model :2B020H1 C2D utilized an 250 GB seagate. the rest of the system samsung 1TB/maxtor 200 gb tested both over time.
This is computers i actually work on, do productive work, and my experience can be described over many pages, but gives me no answer what so ever, i use them all several hours while the 9850BE is my primary computer and its running 3400 mhz.
The 2800+ is also the fastest system to boot, open cpu-z and firefox, and running the oldest install of windows which makes the experience more strange for me.
I'd totally see the K8 K10 architecture feeling smoother than Core 2, but compared to core 7 in 4 threads vs 4 threads, i'd say its just the same by my wild guess, but on this subject there cannot be any benchmarks, and when using an 2800+ i kind of getting the feeling that all the new computers ive bought lately is just a pure waste
thank you fella's, had been looking in the config file and just couldn't remember what to do. :up:
On asus 790GX setting vcore to 1.55 in bios gives actual vcore of 1.586, AOD maxes volts at 1.55. Still, means less time i have to spend resetting the bios now so much obliged, and lotsa benchs to post (again actually ;) ) so look forward
New world record :-
Nº 1 : authienvu8@OCCLub_amtech.vn reached 6231.01 MHz with an AMD Phenom II (45 nm)
http://valid.canardpc.com/show_oc.php?id=474771
Nice